WPC/I  5 : |#mi gLShU\сc s%DV^3^CD:d pآ-QHC8eD?.>ʚfl':ph5Sc y]pDzXb#:YSyS X81Kh'Zoeyt8|e7gq晁&?îA Rm71JᤨGIjmknhǠ^P/F)MX[^P!V^˙{c*O:%=0 eglY,id1dAt[dڛQ;G[dG|!d::[L^٫l}:EFbB9[1QGd9U}loRsS e6<_ȸ~yr__>Sk)W{NhRm&ErgV+ߪ\X}K=kORb,6lw %^  0w UN 4n  z   m 72 1(  u ;  0cN* 0w, 0E- 0/ 0 0 0J 0% 0D 1uX 72 1 72 0D 0 0  D/ 0N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0b_ 0g 0I! 0(" 0# 0# 0$ 0% 0V& 0#' 0' 0( 0) 0* 0_+ 04, 0- 0- 0. 00j/ 0</ 0/ 0>0 0v0 0`H1 0`1 0`2 0`h2 0`2 08(3 0`3 0224 0d4 0:`5 0Y5 0_5 0R6 0j=7 08 B*+: BU: 0r: 0; D3< D-< 0K< D/E= ASt== 0> 0D1? Au? 0 @ 06@ 0$A 0:,B 0^fB 0<B 0NCU6NCU>CU*C#CU@EE-FU N0F~FGU@HU:H I Ipwd[) (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman RegularQX)\PT3|x C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptU "h6CEIMQUY]aAutoList1""""""""i)1)a)Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(;3$2#  0  .3  0  (O;$0  2#  a  .3  0` (#(#(b$0  0` (#(#2#   .3  0 ` (#` (#(xir$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#2#(  0  )3  0 (# (#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#2#(  a  )3  0h(#(#(F$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#2#(   )3  0h(#h(#($0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#2#  0  )3  0(#(#({$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#2#  a  )3  0p(#(#(F$0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#0p(#(#2#     )3  0p(#p(# 3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)hFCEIMQUY]aAutoList2""""""""i)1)a)"(#$  0  22+M 0_level9    x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  4go2Keyboard Ki<6X9`(Courier NewK XXXSj\  `&Times New RomanSU)1dxd2J+M 0_level1  X 2( ` hp x 223  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2G+M 0_level2   /%` ` hp x /23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2D+M 0_level3   ," hp x ,23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2A+M 0_level4  ` ) hp x )23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2>+M 0_level5   &hhp x &23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2;+M 0_level6   #p x #23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  28+M 0_level7  h  p x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  25+M 0_level8   pp x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  - -2JM 0_levsl1  X 2( ` hp x 223  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2GM 0_levsl2   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2DM 0_levsl3   ," hp x ,23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2AM 0_levsl4  ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2>M 0_levsl5   &hhp x &23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2;M 0_levsl6   #p x #23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  28M 0_levsl7  h  p x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  25M 0_levsl8   pp x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  22M 0_levsl9    x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2JM 0_levnl1  X 2( ` hp x 223   5+ ` hp x 5  2GM 0_levnl2   /%` ` hp x /23   5+ ` hp x 5  2DM 0_levnl3   ," hp x ,23   5+ ` hp x 5  2AM 0_levnl4  ` ) hp x )23   5+ ` hp x 5  2>M 0_levnl5   &hhp x &23   5+ ` hp x 5  2;M 0_levnl6   #p x #23   5+ ` hp x 5  28M 0_levnl7  h  p x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  25M 0_levnl8   pp x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  22M 0_levnl9    x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  0.Normal<:Definition T<AA:Definition L , 5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 586Definition(''&H1      XXX(&H2  XXX(&H3  XXX(&H4 XXX XXX(&H5  XXX(&H6  XXX20Address8MM6Blockquote , , 5+ ` hp x 5   5+ ` hp x 5,*CITE,dl*CODEKi<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXSj\  `&Times New RomanS42Emphasis64Hyperlink    <:FollowedHype    (|G2v$ !.8MDd d 8         0  .<:Preformatted/%  ,Kk %#/Ki<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXSj\  `&Times New RomanS/%  ,Kk %#/<:zBottom of 7$(X7  ?k%2A`Arial?7Z(X7  XXXSj\  `&Times New RomanS&  d d d<:zTop of For7\(X7  ?k%2A`Arial?7Z(X7  XXXSj\  `&Times New RomanS(|3$ !.8MDd d 8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  U)2dxd^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$ !.8MDd d 8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK0KS.SampleKi<6X9`(Courier NewKSj\  `&Times New RomanS0.Strong 8dl6TypewriterKi<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXSj\  `&Times New RomanS42Variable: 8HTML MarkupB      2 0CommentB  (O$<6X9`(Courier New\  `&Times New Roman%2A`ArialHP LaserJet 8000 Series PS0(9 Z(Times New Roman     ##pCXd#(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular  Rv$      1  p p  _Ԁm  pContestantdidnotraiseanyissueinthetrialconcerningtheactionofMr.LawsononbehalfofMs.Lawson. Rv$      2  p p  _Ԁs5  pThechancerycourtistheprobatecourtfor_Fayette_ԀCounty.(hH  Z(Times New Roman ,cAZ"Arial Regular12D1C12D1D !.8Ud d8     _  p((p8;,XXdd 8  @ p=9p((INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @%ATJACKSON#p((p=9 #Ԉ &   September20,2000Session L pXwtXp(( #p((XpXwt#INTHEMATTEROFTHEESTATEOFFANNIECORRINE_BARNHILL_pXwtXp((  J @@ ADirectAppealfromtheChanceryCourtfor_Fayette_ԀCounty  J @@No.P343TheHonorableMarthaB._Brasfield_,Judge  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.W200000289_COA_ԄR3CVFiledOctober25,2000   AV) ` dE<|` A }     Willcontestantvoluntarilydismissedchancerycourtproceedingtocontestwill.Subsequently, x  contestantfiledanothernoticetocontestthewill.Thetrialcourt,onmotion,dismissedthe d proceedingasbarred,becauseithadpreviouslybeendismissed,andsuchanactioniswithinan P exceptionto_Tenn.R.Civ.P._Ԁ41.01(1).Contestanthasappealed. < #p((XpXwt#pXwtXp(( _Tenn.R.App.P._Ԁ3;AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheChanceryCourtAffirmedand P Remanded  <   #p((pXwt#pXwtX.p((W.FrankCrawford,P.J.,W.S.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichDavidR.Farmer,  J.andHollyKirby_Lillard_,J.,joined.  LeeSSaunders,Somerville,ForAppellant,BeatriceRice  J.HoustonGordon,Covington,ForAppellee,HelenWeston_Armour_ԀLawson ` WilliamS.Rhea,Somerville,ForAppellee,AnnieJaneBailey 8!   OPINION #p((XpXwt#pXwtXp(( #`" #p((XpXwtt #  pXwtXp((mXwtXXpXwtnOaoz  Appellant,BeatriceRice(hereinafterContestant),appealsfromtheorderoftheFayette %$!% CountyChanceryCourtdismissinghersecondnoticeofwillcontest. &"&   FannieCorrineBarnhilldiedwithoutissueontheNovember27,1995.OnJanuary29,1996, (#( AnnieJaneBailey,filedapetitionforprobateofthelastwillandtestamentofFannieCorrine )$) BarnhilldatedAugust21,1991,intheChanceryCourtofFayetteCounty,Tennessee.Anorderof p*%* ProbatewasenteredonJanuary29,1996,admittingthewilltoprobate.Pursuanttothewill,the \+&+  orderappointedAnnieJaneBaileyasexecutrixoftheestate.OnNovember20,1996,theexecutrix H,', oz o8pwtpXXdXXd8 o  filedapetitiontoclosetheestateonreceipt,release,andwaiverofHelenWestonLawson,thesole  beneficiarynamedinthewilland,onthesamedate,anorderwasenteredclosingtheestate.     OnDecember20,1996,Contestant,oneofFannieCorrineBarnhillssurvivingnieces,filed t anoticeofcontestofthewillofFannieCorrineBarnhill,deceased.Contestantallegedthatshewas ` namedasalegateeinawilldatedMay7,1974,andshecontestedtheprobateoftheinstrument L  offeredbyAnnieJaneBailey.Contestantaverredthatatthetimeofthemakingofthewilldated 8  August21,1991,FannieCorrieBarnhillwasincompetentandundersuchmentaldiseasethatthe $ t instrumentiswithoutlegaleffectandisanullity.Contestantfurtherallegedthatundueinfluence  ` wasexerciseduponFannieCorrieBarnhillresultingintheexecutionoftheinstrumentdatedAugust  L  21,1991.  8    OnFebruary4,1998,ErnestLawson,servinginarepresentativecapacityforhiswife,q !#  1      ׀Helen   Lawson,filedamotiontodismissforlackofprosecution.Themotionaverredthatsincethefiling   ofthenoticeofcontestonDecember20,1996,nofurtheractionhadbeentaken.Ahearingwasset   forMarch20,1998,howeverEarnestLawsonreleasedhiscounselonthatdateandonMarch24,   1998anoticeofappearancewasfiledbyhisnewcounselalongwithanothermotiontodismissfor p lackofprosecution.OnApril24,1998,anorderwasenteredsubstitutingcounselforpetitioner, \ BeatriceRice.OnSeptember22,1998,amotionwasfiledtodismissforlackofprosecutionorin H thealternative,motionfortrialsetting.Themotionaverredthatsinceapretrialconferenceheldon 4 May22,1998,Ms.Ricehadneitherrequestedanydiscoverynorhadsheaskedforatrialdate.At  p ahearingonthemotiononMarch8,1999,Contestanttookavoluntarynonsuit,andanorderwas  \ soentered. H   OnAugust19,1999,Contestantfiledinchancerycourtanoticeofsecondcontestofwilland   motion.Ms.Ricemovedthecourttomakeafindingoffactofthewillcontestandtotransferthe   mattertochancerycourt.rT !#  2      ׀OnSeptember3,1999,Contestantfiledacomplaintinchancerycourtto  contesttheprobatedwillandrequestedajurytrial.OnSeptember23,1999,HelenLawsonfileda  motiontodismisswhichwasheardonOctober8,1999.Fromthebench,thechancellorgrantedthe  motiontodismissandanorderwasenteredJanuary20,2000,whichstatesinpertinentpart: l 8  8`    ItappearingtotheCourtthattherehadbeenanearliernotice D! ofcontestofwillfiledbyBeatriceRicewhichproceededtoahearing 0"  thereononMarch8,1998;and,afterbeginningsaidhearing,the #l! contestant,BeatriceRice,announcedthatshewastakingavoluntary $X" nonsuitandanorderofnonsuitwasenteredinthiscause;andthe $D # CourthavingonOctober8,1998,rendereditsfindingsanddecision %0!$ orallyinopencourtasshowninthetranscript,thesamebeing &"% attachedheretoandincorporatedhereinbyreference;and'#&` x` x Ї8  8`    Itfurtherappearingtothecourtthat,oncehavingtakenanon  suit,thecontestant,BeatriceRice,isnowbarredfromrelitigating  and/orreopeningthiswillcontest,themotiontodismissfiledherein  iswelltakenandshouldbegranted.t` x` x   Ms._Barnhill_Ԁappealstheorderofthetrialcourtraisingtwoissuesasstatedinherbrief: L  8  8`   I.Whetherthefirstwillcontestproceedingsmaturedtoaproperly $ t institutedwillcontestofwhichthechancerytrialcourthad  ` jurisdictiontotryontheissueof_devisavit_ԀvelnononMarch8,1999. L ` x` x 8  8`   II.Whetherthetrialcourterredbydismissingthesecondwillcontest $  ongroundsthatthecontestantsvoluntarydismissalofthefirst   contestbarredtherefilingofthewillcontest. ` x` x   Withregardtowhetherchancerycourthadjurisdictionoverthefirstwillcontest,Ms.Rice   assertsthattheproceduralstepsessentialtotheproperinstitutionofawillcontestnevertookplace p andthatthetrialcourtneveracquiredjurisdictionoftheaction.Ms.Ricecontendsthatthetrial \ courterredinrulingthatnoorderisnecessarytoretainjurisdictioninthechancerytrialcourt H becausethisassumesthatthemerefilingofawillcontestintheprobatecourtautomaticallylodges 4 jurisdictioninthechancerytrialcourttotheexclusionofcircuitcourt,therebynegatingtheparties  p abilitytoelectbetweenchanceryandcircuitcourt.Inessence,Contestantassertsthattheremustbe  \ anordertransferringthecasefromtheprobatejurisdictionofthecourttothechanceryjurisdiction. H Contestantaversthatsincenosuchorderwasentered,thematterneveradvancedbeyondthestrictly 4 probatefunctionofthecourtandthetrialcourtneveracquiredjurisdictiontotrythewillcontest.   OntheotherhandMs.LawsonassertsMs.Riceinvokedthejurisdictionofthechancerycourtin   filingherwillcontestandthatherassertionthatchancerycourtlackedjurisdictioniswithoutmerit.    _T.C._ԀA.324109states:  8  8`    Trialsuponvalidityofwills!Jurisdictionofcourts.! X ` x` x 8  8`   Anycourtofrecordhavingprobatejurisdiction,whetherachancery D! courtorothercourtofrecordestablishedbyprivateorpublicact,has 0"  concurrentjurisdictionwiththecircuitcourttoconducttrialsupon #l! thevalidityofwills,allinthesamemannerandtothesameextentas $X" prescribedinthischapterforcircuitcourts,exceptthatnocertificate $D # ofthecontestorcertificateoftheverdictandjudgmentshallbe %0!$ requiredintheabsenceofanyreferraltoanothercourt.&"%` x` x _T.C.A._Ԁ324109(Supp.1999).   (#'   Thechancerycourthasjurisdictioninprobatemattersforcountiesasdescribedin_T.C.A._Ԁ#pXwtXXmXwt #tXPOXXpXwt#pXwtXXtXPO-#mXwtXXpXwt |*%) 1616201(1994).Thechancerycourtinthiscasetookjurisdictionofthecasewhenthepetitionfor h+&* probatewasfiled,andpursuantto_T.C.A._Ԁ#pXwtXXmXwt-#tXPOXXpXwt#pXwtXXtXPO.#mXwtXXpXwtԀ324109(Supp.1999),thewillcontestwasproperlyin  chancerycourtwithoutnecessityofanycertificateofcontest,becausetherewasnoreferralto  anothercourt.Moreover,itappearsthatContestantisseekingtoberelievedfromtheeffectofa  voluntary_nonsuit_Ԁinthefirstwillcontestbyvirtueofherassertionthatthereneverwasawillcontest t sincetherewasnocertificationfromthe probatesectionofchancerycourttothe trialsection ` ofchancerycourt.Ifweacceptsuchapositionforthepurposeofargument,thatpresentsanother L  problemfortheContestant._T.C.A._Ԁ#pXwtXXmXwt+/#tXPOXXpXwt#pXwtXXtXPO2#mXwtXXpXwtԀ324108(Supp.1999)provides: 8   mXmXwt#pm2#jp% u 8  8`    #jXwtXj%3##pXwtXXjXwtg3#jXwtXXpXwt&  J jXjXwt  Sc  ` SJ'4  jXwtXj#pXwtXXjXwt3#jXwtXXpXwt324108.Statuteoflimitations.J'44݌c ` x` x Ќ jXwtXXjXwt  A  S E A5  %u3% v ' 4%v58  8`   Allactionsorproceedingstosetasidetheprobateofanywill,or  E  petitionstocertifysuchwillforanissueofdevisavitvelnon,mustbe 1  broughtwithintwo(2)yearsfromentryoftheorderadmittingthe   willtoprobate,orbeforeverbarred,saving,however,topersons   undertheageofeighteen(18)yearsorofunsoundmind,atthetime   thecauseofactionaccrues,therightsconferredby281106.A55݌ ` x` x Ќ    ContestantssecondwillcontestwhichhasresultedinthisappealwasfiledAugust16,1999, _ morethantwoyearsaftertheentryoftheorderadmittingthewilltoprobate.Thus,withouta K previousnonsuittoinvokethesavingsstatute,Contestantssuitisbarredbythestatuteof 7 limitations. #   AstoContestantssecondissue,sheassertsthatthetrialcourterredindismissingthecase Q becauseofthevoluntarydismissalofthefirstcontest,inasmuchasshewasentitledtoavoluntary = dismissalbyvirtueofTenn.R.Civ.P.41.01.Wemustrespectfullydisagree.Thiscaseiscontrolled )y bythisCourtsopinionin InRe:EstateofBarnwell ,No.01A019711PB00656,1998WL755011 e (Tenn.Ct.App.Oct.30,1998).In Barnwell ,thisCourtaffirmedthetrialcourtsorderdismissing Q plaintiffssecondcomplaintcontestingthewillofhermother.TheCourtstatedthathaving = voluntarilydismissedanearliercomplaintinwhichtheplaintiffcontestedthewill,shewasbarred ) fromrefilingtheactiontocontestthewill.TheCourtnotedthatpriortotheadoptionofthe   TennesseeRulesofCivilProcedure,Tennesseecourtsprohibitedlitigantsfromrefilingawillcontest ! afterearliertakinganonsuitofthecontestofthesamewill. SeeArnoldv._Marcom_ ,49Tenn.App. " 161,352S.W.2d936(1961).The Barnwell Courtdiscussedthehistoryoftheruleinthisstateand # thennotedthatitwasdealingwithamatteroffirstimpressionsincetheadoptionoftheTennessee u$  RulesofCivilProcedure.TheCourtnotedthatRule41.01(1),Tenn.R.Civ.P.,providesthatthe a% ! righttotakeavoluntarynonsuittodismissanactionwithoutprejudiceis [s]ubjecttotheprovisions M&!" ofRule23.05orRule66oranystatute.#pXwtXXjXwt4#mXwtXXpXwtԀTheCourtthenstated: 9'"# 8  8`   Rule66providesthat,withtwoexceptions,theTennesseeRulesof )%% CivilProcedureshallapplytoactionswhichare broughtbyor *%& againstareceiver"ortoactions inwhichtheappointmentofa +&' nOa n n  receiverissought.Tenn.R.Civ.P.66.Thefirstexceptiontothisrule  isthat [a]nactionwhereinareceiverhasbeenappointedshallnotbe  dismissedexceptbyorderofthecourt. Id. Thesecondexception  isthat [t]hepracticeintheadministrationofestatesbyreceiversor t byothersimilarofficersappointedbythecourtshallbeinaccordance ` withthestatutesofthisstateandwiththepracticeheretofore L  followedinthecourtsofthisstate. Id .(Footnoteomitted).8 ` x` x  Id. at*4.The Barnwell CourtconcludedthatRule66wouldbeapplicabletothewillcontest   proceedingandthat,therefore,becauseofthepracticeheretoforefollowedinthecourtsofthisstate,    acontestantisnotentitledtofileasecondwillcontestaftervoluntarilydismissingthefirstcontest.     Accordingly,theorderofthetrialcourtisaffirmed,andthecaseisremandedtothetrialcourt   forsuchfurtherproceedingsasmaybenecessary.Costsoftheappealareassessedtoappellant,   BeatriceRice,andhersurety.   #pXwtXXmXwtXA##pXpXwt4#pXwtXp   `     h   __________________________________________ ?    `     h   W.FRANKCRAWFORD,PRESIDINGJUDGE,W.S.